Congress must pass trade pacts [says Bush and 11 LatAm leaders]

[arcos]

Source: AFP

NEW YORK (AFP) — US President George W. Bush, meeting with Western Hemisphere leaders, called Wednesday for US lawmakers to approve trade pacts with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea "as soon as possible."

"It's important that these agreements be passed as soon as possible," said Bush, who has expressed frustration over election-year inaction on the accords, which are stalled in the Democratic-held US Congress.

"It's important for the American people to understand that exports benefit workers. Half of our growth last year was the result of trade. And therefore, it's in our interest to continue to open up markets," he said.

He spoke surrounded by representatives -- nine presidents, one vice president and an ambassador -- of 11 countries.

Nations represented included
Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, and Peru, according to the White House.

Read more: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hLpCKMcSaREt6IaiSZxesQBlfppw

[DCKit]

1. I wonder how much they had to pay to get anyone "on the record."

And notice who's missing from the line-up of usual suspects.

[Peace Patriot]

6. Who's missing? Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Uruguay, Paraguay and

Nicaragua; also the small countries Guyana and Suriname.

Please note: Canada is not a Latin American country.

Of the ten L/A countries mentioned: Honduras just punched the Bushwhacks in the nose last week, by joining the Bolivarian trade group, ALBA (organized initially by Hugo Chavez of Venezuela), and by refusing to accept the credentials of the U.S. ambassador (because of U.S. meddling in Bolivia, which expelled the U.S. ambassador to Bolivia); a leftist is leading in the polls in the El Salvador presidential election (vote is in 3/09); I believe a leftist may be doing well in Panama; a leftist came within a hairsbreadth (0.05%) of winning the presidency of Mexico in 2005 (and there is great discontent about the rightwing/Corpo government trying to privatize Mexico's constitutionally protected oil resource); Guatemala just elected its first progressive government, ever, whose social justice goals resemble those of the Bolivarian countries; and Peru's corrupt, repressive "free tradist" government is extremely unpopular (20% approval rating--as bad as Bush), and voters will likely elect a leftist next time around.

That's 6 out of the 10 countries on the list--of countries in the western hemisphere still willing to meet with Bush--where the trend is strongly to the left. Honduras' president is particularly hostile to the Bush "free trade" regime, and is aligning with the Bolivarians. And I would question whether Chile was anxious for Bush to award "free trade" to the government of rightwing death squads in Colombia. Chile's president was tortured by Pinochet.

I would strongly question the construction Arcos has put on this article, and the addition he or she has made to its title--"Congress must pass trade pacts (says Bush and 11 LatAm leaders)." "...says 11 LatAm leaders" is not in the title of the article. There were ten L/A leaders present, and they are not quoted in the article. The article merely says Bush was "surrounded" by reps from these countries. We don't know in what manner, nor for what purpose, they were there. There is simply no information in this very short article to indicate their positions on Bush "free trade" in Colombia, Panama and South Korea. They could have been just sitting there, and Bush was lecturing them on "free trade." They could have been shaking their heads no. They could have spoken against it. We don't know.

Corpo/fascist 'news' (and I include AFP) often misconstrues what is happening in Latin America, particularly with regard to "free trade." I would have to see a more detailed article, with quotes of these leaders, to understand what was going on, and I certainly would not make the presumption that they all support Bush policy.

[arcos]

8. This was the only article about it I found in English...

I'm sorry, but it's not my fault that agencies and media sources publish different versions of newspieces in English and Spanish. You know well the type of things that the media does... it's really not my fault that US media outlets decided not to cover this. You should protest them, not blame me.

You can check out the article in Spanish...


Bush obtiene el apoyo al libre comercio de 10 líderes americanos

Nueva York (AFP). El presidente estadounidense, George W. Bush, obtuvo este miércoles el respaldo de nueve gobiernos latinoamericanos y del de Canadá a la principal herramienta de política exterior de su gobierno para la región, los acuerdos de libre comercio, a dos meses de dejar la Casa Blanca.

En una declaración conjunta bajo el título "Camino a la prosperidad en las Américas", los líderes de los once países reafirmaron sus "compromisos compartidos con el comercio y la liberalización de inversiones, la inclusión social, el desarrollo, el derecho y la democracia".

http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/24/economia1713624.html


Rough translation: US President George W. Bush, won the support Wednesday of nine Latin American governments and Canada, for the main tool of his foreign policy for the region, free trade agreements, two months before leaving the White House.

In a joint statement under the title "Road to Prosperity in the Americas", the leaders of the 11 countries reaffirmed their "shared compromises with commerce and investments liberalization, social inclusion, development, law and democracy."



You can also read the statement at whitehouse.gov... I found it using Google News in less than 30 seconds.

Pathways to Prosperity in the Americas
1. We, the Heads of Government and representatives for Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Peru and the United States, met in New York on September 24, 2008, to take stock of the significant progress we have made in our hemisphere through shared commitments to trade and investment liberalization, social inclusion, development, rule of law, and democracy. We noted that we have each taken steps to conclude and bring into force comprehensive and high-quality free trade agreements that have contributed significantly to reducing poverty, opening our economies, and strengthening our democracies.
...
3. We underscored the importance of comprehensive free trade agreements in advancing liberalized trade and investment regimes, thereby providing new economic opportunities for all in our societies, including workers, businesspeople, and agricultural communities.
...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/09/20080924.html


These leaders were all there, they all signed this statement, it was released and they surrounded Bush. What other evidence do you need?

Oh, there's also a pic...



Caption: President Bush, center, makes a statement on Free Trade with Western Hemisphere leaders, Wednesday, Sept. 24, 2008, at the Council of the Americas in New York.


I don't think any of them are objecting...

[DCKit]

12. Nobody's blaming you for anything.

Me and the PP are huge critics of U.S. Policy and this is just "business as usual" for the Bush Junta - and all the more transparent because of the names/countries involved, especially those not listed.

If you want excellent analysis of our "relations" with Central and South America, I would suggest researching Peace Patriot's posts.

If either of us gave any impression of being upset over your post, it was the news, not the messenger. I'm very grateful for the information.

[arcos]

13. I know quite a bit about US relations with Latin America, thank you...

I am in Latin America.

Me and my fellow Costa Ricans experienced first hand the tactics the Bush administration uses, specifically in this case of free trade agreements.


I respect and admire Peace Patriot's posts, but I don't always agree with his or her analysis. To be honest, a lot of these analysis I read here on DU about Latin America (not PP's, but in general) tend to oversimplify things quite a bit, and sometimes assumptions that are not correct are made. For example, in this case questioning whether Michelle Bachelet would like the US to have free trade with Colombia because she was tortured by Pinochet.... Chile is the country with most free trade agreements in the world, and Bachelet has always been a huge supporter of free trade. Since she took office, she has expanded free trade, and promoted trade agreements between the US and other countries. She is the freaking free trade queen of the Americas! Yes, she was tortured, but that has nothing to do with her support for free trade, nothing at all. And yes, I still like her, she's much better than most other Chilean politicians, but that doesn't mean she's perfect, or that I agree with everything she does, or that I will refuse to criticize her when I don't agree.

He or she also says that a leftist is likely to be elected in Perú... well, I'd it's possible that a leftist will be elected in Perú, but Ollanta Humala is currently trailing one to one matchups with all other candidates, including the daughter of right winger and former President Alberto Fujimori which seems to be leading most polls. I could go on on things I don't agree with or that I think are factually incorrect.


And yes, PP gave me the impression that he or she was upset: "I would strongly question the construction Arcos has put on this article"...

[Peace Patriot]

18. I agree with most of your comments on Batchelet, but, even though she was there,

and signed this statement, I still wonder if she supports the U.S. (Bush) "free trade" deal with Colombia. Criminy, they chainsaw union leaders there, while alive, and throw their body parts into mass graves!

The statement seems banal (and kind of strange, actually), but the article mentions three specific countries--Colombia, Panama and North Korea. It was Bush who was pushing these three agreements, trying to pressure Congress--where labor Democrats have put up a strong and effective resistance to the Colombia "free trade " deal. (It's about the only thing that this Diebold (s)elected Congress has shown any spine on.) The statement doesn't mention these deals (that I can tell). So GENERALLY being for "free trade" doesn't mean you approve of every "free trade" deal, or approve of Bush, for that matter.

Strange, because it says that they "reaffirmed" their "shared compromises with commerce and investments liberalization, social inclusion, development, law and democracy."

"Compromises" with "democracy"? Maybe something got lost in the translation. Or Bush wrote it.

I'm sorry about attacking you. It's just a really important matter to me what Latin American leaders are saying and doing--I follow it closely--and I didn't see your addendum to the title supported in the article. I'm still somewhat surprised that Chile and Honduras participated, and I wonder what their leaders were really thinking, standing around President Fuckwad, as he sought to reward the fascist thugs running Colombia with a "free fire zone" against union leaders, and lots more goodies from Amurka.

But I know that Batchelet has been playing a double game, with regard to the huge leftist tide on the continent--riding that tide for the clout it gives her with the Bushwhacks, to gain advantages for Chile (or for Chile's upper/business class). On the other hand, she negotiated sea access for Bolivia (a very big boon to Evo Morales), and called the UNASUR meeting where they got unanimity on backing Morales against the fascist secessionists. Her political strategy is understandable, but two-faced. And Honduras' president may be in the same mold. The Bushwhacks have neglected Honduras, and he complained loudly about it a few weeks ago, and joined ALBA, and basically said he's going leftist (toward Chavez). Maybe they've yanked him back into the Bushwhack "trade" fold. Dunno.

The photo, meeting and statement are dismaying. I hate to see people toadying to the worst president in U.S. history--a lawless mass murderer and torturer, whose puppetmasters are looting us blind, and could well destroy much of the world economy, and send billions of people into starvation--for what little perks they will get, for their unimportant little countries. It makes me cringe. It is so obviously staged to make it appear that Bush still has some cache in Latin America, where he is loathed even more than he is here. It reminds me of the "Coalition of the Kneecapped" joining the "shock and awe" fun in Iraq. ("Don't forget Poland!")

I hope you're wrong about Peru.

[arcos]

9. Not much probably...

Most of these leaders are right wing hacks. Some more than others, but right wing hacks after all.

[Pete2069]

2. Giving more of our jobs away will really help our economy.

You would think they would be looking to create new jobs in
our country instead of still shipping them overseas...

Take the money from the workers and give it to corporations to
build their plants overseas and then ship our jobs to the
plants they build with our money....

This government is all BS.

WAKE UP AMERICANS we need to take action.... 
We need to replace them all NOW>

[OhioChick]

7. Well Said. n/t

[stillcool]

3. "Exports benefit workers"..

can't deny that. Look at how well China and India are doing?

[Indenturedebtor]

4. Yes but on the balance we'll import more than we export

Except for agriproducts which are largely produced by undocumented workers who work for huge conglomerates which are subsidized instead of taxed.

Take a hike Shrub!

[BearSquirrel2]

11. Which in turn ...

Which in turn will dislocate domestic farmers and make it more likely that they will grow Cocaine and Marijauna.

[Indenturedebtor]

15. Which I don't have a problem with... the cocaine and marijuana part

We could grow that here and tax it like sane people. But yeah our massive corn syrup exports screw up those "family farm values" that we flushed down the toilet here 40 years ago or so.

[bluesmail]

5. Let's see, they are busy on the financial stick-up. Let's throw more

pressure on them. Just because we're not handling the pressure well, doesn't mean they will. Head Hurts

[BearSquirrel2]

10. These "trade pacts" are one of the causes of the financial crisis

Too much money is flowing out and it's making Americans poor. This is why we needed so much credit, to sustain our lifestyles when manufacturing was leaving the country.

We need more "free trade" like we need a whole in the head.

[fascisthunter]

14. don't Worry Bush, They Will Give You What You Want...

they always do...

[Hugin]

16. Queue up Cave #2!

Keep on caving! Woohoo!

[fascisthunter]

17. it really looks like it's all bullshit

all of it.... you know what's even more infuritaing? This is only a frigging bandaid on a massive festering wound...